Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/20/2005 - MinutesROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES PUBLIC HEARING — JULY 20, 2005 PRESENT: Mr. Eric Thomas, Chairman Mr. Richard Jones Mr. Eldon Karr Mr. Carlton Wright Mr. Kevin Barnes Mr. Joseph Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney Mr. Tim Beard, Alternate Secretary Ms. Susan Carter, Recording Secretary Mr. Eric Thomas called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Wright moved to approve the agenda. Mr. Jones seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING PETITION 1. The petition of Cellco Partnership dlbla Verizon Wireless for an administrative appeal of the Zoning Administrator's interpretation of the definition of a broadcast tower, Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Section 30 -29 -7, and the need for a special use permit, Section 30-- 54- 2 (B)4. The purpose of this request is to determine if the proposed construction constitutes a broadcast tower, located at 6720 Thirlane Road, Catawba Magisterial District. Mr. Patrick Fennel, Esquire, spoke on behalf of the petitioner. He introduced Mr. Marshall Pearsall of Verizon Wireless and Mr. Jack Ellinwood of Engineering Concepts, Inc. He explained drawings of the structure. He noted the Board of Supervisors denied the Special Use Permit and the court upheld the appeal. He stated the structure is an intricate part of Verizon's operation. He stated Verizon took all steps to provide information throughout the process in accordance with county regulations. He stated they complied with every request made by the county. He briefly discussed provisions of the code. He stated the roof top structure does not meet the definition of a tower. He stated the primary 1 function of the tower is to support the antenna. He stated the petitioner went to extraordinary steps to inform the county of their intentions. Mr. Marshall Pearsall, Verizon Wireless, spoke representing the petitioner. He stated they complied fully with all applicable laws, providing documentation to the county and receiving documentation from the county. He stated the petitioner has purchased the land for $375,000 and spent $250,000 on architecture and engineering consultations. He stated they closed on the property on August 12, 2004. He stated they received the Building Permit on February 10, 2005. He described the open -bid process from which they chose AVIS Construction. He stated based on information received from the county, they purchased materials. He stated they purchased materials before and after receiving the permit. He described the structure as a small metropolitan switch center. He stated it will act as a communication link between the cell site and router, connecting cell sites to land lines. He stated they have security concerns with the current facility which is located at Valley Pointe since it is leased and tenants reside on either side of that facility. He stated Verizon is taking the initiative to move its facilities to stand alone buildings. Mr. Wright inquired about a letter with an error regarding date of the letter. Mr. Fennel presented a corrected copy of the letter to the BZA members. Mr. Fennel began reviewing a chronology of events. Mr. Jack Ellinwood, Engineering Concepts, Inc., stated the design team wanted to make sure they complied with the county, following the denial of the SUP. He stated he had conversations with county staff related to this structure. He stated he met numerous times with county staff. He stated he met with Mr. David Holladay regarding height. He stated based on meetings, they submitted documents. He stated the meeting with Mr. Holladay occurred on May 21, 2004. Mr. Fennel reviewed the sequence of events. He referred to and reviewed a letter dated May 18, 2004, from Ms. Denise Sowder, Development Review Coordinator regarding submitted drawings. He referred to a letter from Ms. Sowder to Mr. Pearsall dated June 15, 2004 requesting two sets of sealed plans. He stated on August 5, 2004, Mr. Pearsall received a letter from Ms. Sowder stating Roanoke County approved the plans. He stated on August 12, 2004 Verizon went through with the purchase of the property. He stated on October 27, 2004 Mr. Ellinwood submitted additional sets of plans. He stated on February 10, 2005 a building permit was issued for the Thirlane Road construction site at which time Avis Construction began building. He stated on April 12, 2005 Mr. Pearsall received a letter from Mr. John Murphy requiring an SUP to 2 operate the switch center. Mr. Fennel stated the time between February 10, 2005 and April 12, 2005 is 61 days since the building permit was issued. He explained VA Code Ann. 15.2 -2307 and 15.2- 3311(C). He stated the Zoning Administrator is in violation of these laws. He reviewed the definition of a broadcast tower. He reviewed the height requirements in G-2 zoning. Mr. Thomas asked if the tower was drawn on every set of plans submitted to the county. Mr. Fennel stated you cannot tell there is a tower from the site plans. He stated the drawings which show the tower are elevation drawings. Mr. Karr asked if the tower could have been seen in the submitted plans. Mr. Fennel stated Mr. Ellinwood had conversations with staff regarding the plans. Mr. Karr asked if the structure has footings. Mr. Fennel affirmed it does have footings. Mr. Karr stated the tower appears to be an independent structure. Mr. Fennel stated the petitioner was told by Mr. Murphy the tower would be acceptable to county if a wall was placed around it. Mr. Obenshain stated he was not aware of that representation. Mr. Ellinwood stated he has his email account of that conversation with Mr. Holladay and Mr. Murphy on April 5, 2005. Mr. Barnes asked if the elevation drawing was in the first submittal package. Mr. Ellinwood stated he included that drawing with subsequent submittals. Mr. Karr discussed the drawings. He asked if the drawings were discussed with Mr. Holladay and Mr. Murphy. Mr. Ellinwood stated they were responding to Ms. Sowder's letter. Mr. Karr referred to the previous Summary Judgment in favor of the county. Mr. Fennel referred to Ms. Sowder's letter of May 18, 2005 permitting the petitioner to start construction. Mr. Karr asked why there was not more discussion. Mr. Fennel stated the petitioner responded to the needs of the county. Mr. Karr stated perhaps there was a lack of communication. Mr. Fennel stated Verizon should not be held responsible. Mr. Obenshain spoke representing the Community Development Department. He stated the county disagrees with all points made. He stated no staff member can set aside the decision made by Board of Supervisors. He stated there may have been an inadvertent failure from staff to fully communicate. He stated the county and the petitioner were still involved in litigation when the first site plans were submitted. He stated staff had no indication at that time of the antenna and tower. He stated the petitioner did not receive formal approval from Mr. Holladay regarding the tower. He noted Ms. Sowder does not make decisions about zoning. He stated Verizon did not have vested rights because they did not get an SUP. He stated Zoning Ordinance enforcement is completely different from Building Code enforcement. He stated the tower is a completely separate structure. He stated Verizon cannot ignore zoning requirements. 3 Mr. Eric Lewis, 7008 Thirlane Road, presented pictures showing houses located behind the structure. He spoke against the tower. He noted the petitioners are not from this area. He stated his family has lived in that area since the 1930's. Mr. Steve Noble, 5376 Canter Drive, spoke against the structure. He stated the petitioner never returned directly to the Zoning Administrator regarding the structure. He stated the structure is an independent structure. He also stated the tower has already been denied by the courts Ms. Lisa Allagas, 6828 Thirlane Road, stated she is concerned for the welfare of the people. She referred to pictures of towers on the petitioner's website. She expressed concern regarding health issues for the children. Mr. Charles Sweetenberg, 6916 Connie Drive, stated his family has been in this location since the 1900's. He expressed concern regarding disease and property values decreasing. Ms. Shirley Lewis, 6803 Thirlane Road, spoke against the tower. She showed and discussed a petition with signatures of citizens concerned about the tower. Mr. Fennel stated Roanoke County has approved the plan for construction. Mr. Thomas explained the BZA's responsibility. Mr. Fennel stated he is unsure why the county changed its mind. He also noted the Telecommunications Act prohibits using health issues as a reason to refuse the structure. Mr. Karr reviewed the process and dates. Mr. Fennel reviewed submission dates. Mr. Barnes inquired about submitted drawings having relay or broadcasting elements on them. Mr. Ellinwood stated he was unable to find a discernable date on the drawing displayed. Mr. Barnes inquired about elevation drawing being submitted with first site plan submittal. Mr. Ellinwood stated the first site plan submittal was May 3 rd . Mr. Fennel stated he wished Mr. Murphy was here. Mr. Obenshain noted Mr. Murphy was currently on vacation as Mr. Fennel was last month when the petitioner requested a continuance. Mr. Thomas asked if the petitioner had any documentation that the tower would be acceptable if enclosed. Mr. Fennel referred to an email from Mr. Ellinwood in which he described the conversation he had with the county. Mr. Jones inquired about the switching station operation. Mr. Pearsall stated the switching station will provide redundancy for landlines when they are not in operation. Mr. Fennel stated the structure was not designed to withstand the weight of walls. Mr. Karr asked about the function of the structure. Mr. Fennel 11 stated it is an antenna support structure. Mr. Lewis asked about other switching stations in the valley. Mr. Pearsall indicated there are no others in the valley. Mr. Keith Simmons, Verizon Wireless, explained the microwave relay process. He stated the signal has to go over the treeline. He stated they wanted to move the entire office from Valley Pointe to Thirlane Road. He stated the treeline is in excess around Northside Schools. He stated they want to move the microwave antenna over to the Thirlane Road location. Mr. Wright stated the Board of Supervisors denied a Special Use Permit request for a 127 ft. tower. He noted the petitioner has not asked for a SUP for 55 ft. Mr. Fennel stated they have not requested an SUP for 55 ft. because they do not need one. Mr. Obenshain stated if the antenna were on a roof by right it could be a total of 45 ft. Mr. Fennel stated when the petitioner received site plan approval on August 5, 2004, county staff knew elevations. Mr. Karr noted staff could not determine it was an independent structure until they received detailed drawings. Mr. Obenshain stated the site plans did not show elevations. Mr. Karr motioned to uphold the Zoning Administrator's decision Mr. Barnes seconded the motion with the following vote: AYES: Thomas, Karr, Barnes NAYS: Wright, Jones ABSENT: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Barnes moved to approve the June 15, 2005 minutes. Mr. Karr seconded the motion, which carried with the following vote: AYES: Thomas, Wright, Karr, Barnes, Jones NAYS: None ABSENT: None COMMENTS There were none. 5 There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:13 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, 6 ,, a'O�a Approved: Tim Beard, Alternate Secretary Board of Zoning Appeals 10